The Nightly Build...
The Case for Partisan Bickering
Lynn Wooley, in The Dallas Morning News,
makes the case for partisan bickering. He argues that the
founding fathers set this country up with three branches of
government, two houses of Congress, judicial review, checks and
balances, all in order to make it difficult to pass laws. According
to Wooley, the founding fathers did this because of their contempt for
government:
"The more laws Congress passes, the more miserable we all are likely to
be. The federal government has a unique ability to mess up almost
anything it touches, with the exception of our great fighting forces.
Our founding fathers knew that. That's why they made it so hard to get
things done."
Nice theory. Too bad it's wrong. If the founding fathers had so
much contempt for federal government, they had an easy option -- no
federal government at all, just thirteen independent countries. That
they didn't try this option disposes of Wooley's warped view of
American history.
In fact, the founding fathers had great respect for federal
government. The checks and balances they imposed were not to
incapacitate government, but to ensure compromise. The Constitution
itself is the world's greatest example of the good that can come from
compromise. It is built article by article on compromise -- compromise
between north and south, between big state and little, between urban
and rural interests.
Wooley considers compromise to be a dirty word. He explains his
attitude towards political opponents as, "I don't want to compromise
with them. I want to defeat them." Wooley hypocritically publishes his
column praising gridlock just as Democrats regain control of Congress
and look likely to regain control of the White House. His
understanding of history is not only warped, it's self-serving, too.
If the founding fathers could work through their deep differences
and reach consensus on a constitution, it ought to be possible for
today's politicians to work through our differences on health care,
social security, global warming, illegal immigration, etc. Lynn Wooley
exemplifies how far we have fallen from the principles held by our
founding fathers. Ben Franklin famously said, "We must all hang
together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately." His next words,
not recorded by history, were probably something like, "Stop the
partisan bickering, and get something done!"
Huckabee Tap Dances Through the Bible
Jeffrey Weiss, on The Dallas Morning News Religion blog,
points out, without editorial comment, that Mike Huckabee is
trying to put "context" around his "amend the Constitution for God"
comments.
Huckabee is tap dancing without lessons.
He creates a straw man for his anti-abortion argument. He claims
others want to have a right to terminate a human life because of its
inconvenience to others in society. He doesn't address the fundamental
disagreement over when a human life begins. That's an issue that the
Constitution doesn't explicitly settle. Neither does the Bible, for
that matter.
He says the Bible was not written to be amended by each generation.
Then why do we have so many books of the Bible, written over hundreds
of years? Why was a New Testament needed? Why is there a book of
Mormon? Besides, so what? Why should the United States Constitution
have to align with the religious laws of the ancient Jews anyway?
He draws the line at amending the Constitution at just these two
amendments: abortion and marriage. He says it's OK for the
Constitution to not match Biblical tithing laws. Why? He doesn't offer
a rationale. Maybe he just doesn't want to go where his reasoning
would take him. It won't take him to the White House, that's for sure.
